When I reported to college as a freshman, the British historian Arnold Toynbee had completed his twelve-volume history of the world a decade earlier and its theories about the rise and collapse of civilizations remained all the rage on campus. Although I was not a history major, I took most of my electives in the department – including two semesters of Islamic Civilization, which have proven unexpectedly useful. It came as something of a surprise, however, to discover that historical analysis revolves around a handful of competing philosophical frameworks for interpreting what has happened to us as a species.

There are at least two cyclical theories that differ substantially in emphasis. Toynbee postulates successful civilizations are constructed by societies in which an elite class successfully manages the challenges it encounters. Yet, over time, these civilizations begin to both ossify at the top and decay at the bottom, prompting his most famous conclusion that empires are more likely to “commit suicide” than to be defeated by an external attack. This arc from achieving and exercising imperial power, while delivering prosperity, yet proceeding to collapse, has repeated in different places and periods throughout human history. A variant theorizes societies repeat a sequence of victories, followed by crises and reorganization which may or may not succeed.

There are other hypotheses, among them the “great man” or occasionally “great woman” who can steer an empire through their personal strength of character and example. While this analysis has lost popularity in recent years, it retains significant advocates. However wise, effective and forceful such individuals may be, succession always presents a problem for their societies. There are also random walk theorists who view history as being largely shaped by unpredictable events that cannot be anticipated – disease, drought, earthquakes, economic blunders, technological breakthroughs and shocking Black Swan events. This is the “stuff happens” school of history. Further outside the mainstream are theological, conspiracist and magical interpretations.

The foregoing background should serve as preface to George Friedman’s recent book, “The Storm Before the Calm.” Friedman is one of the globe’s premier futurists, founder of the think tank, Geopolitical Futures, and best-selling author of “The Next Decade” and “The Next 100 Years.” While his powers as a seer deserve respect, it is only fair to note that earlier in his career he also authored, “The Coming War with Japan.” So, he doesn’t always get it right. But his latest predictions for America are rooted in the notion that the decade ahead of us will be marked by further discord, insurrections and political menace as we make the transition to an entirely new relationship between voters and their government.

His latest book speculates the United States has an idiosyncratic pattern that we repeat when confronted by institutional (political) and socioeconomic failures. He views the former as linked to an 80-year cycle in which our governing systems reinvent themselves after a spasm of extreme crisis – the Civil War, the Depression and Second World War, and now – welcome to the 2020s. Friedman overlays these geopolitical cataclysms with a secondary cycle of socioeconomic rebuilding occurring on a 50-year clock. Both resets will coincide during the decade ahead, contributing to even further social turmoil. It’s difficult to quarrel with his assessment that the United States seems to have reached a stalemate in public policy – afflicted with a Congress that can no longer solve problems, a federal bureaucracy that cannot explain what it’s doing and an economy that fails to fairly distribute the fruits of our prosperity.

A similar appraisal of Colorado’s political economy indicates such cycles can be broken. I arrived in the state in 1972 when Colorado was experiencing a boom fueled with Canadian oil money. Denver’s first skyscrapers were springing from the ground and, by 1983, a generation of Yuppies were electing their own mayor. This boom did not last as another bust arrived – a century long pattern. Colorado’s prosperity was historically dependent on commodity prices – agricultural and mineral. Federico Peña’s decision to replace Stapleton airport with DIA proved a crucial first step in diversifying Colorado’s economy. Tourism exploded, Denver became a regional hub for transportation and distribution networks serving the region and high value manufacturing and tech development became feasible.

Yet this success came at a price. Colorado runs a very real risk of becoming an inland island for an affluent, technical overclass, much like Silicon Valley. Look at our rising real estate values. Friedman views Trump’s 2016 election as a symptom of emerging resentments. A national revolt against the technocracy may be unavoidable, but Colorado is better positioned to ride out that storm, as we did following the Great Recession. I remain skeptical that yesterday’s actions determine tomorrow’s outcomes. Even though history often rhymes, it rarely replicates the past precisely. I vote for stuff happens!